No one is required to say or acknowledge anything right now. While Mantel's research on the generally accepted procedure surrounding honor combat is commendable, there is currently no provision within the laws of Travance stating that anyone must accept anything of the sort, especially before a higher authority has approved the duel.

His Excellency has made it clear in the past that if two adult subjects of Travance have agreed that they want to settle a score by beating the stuffing out of each other, they can do so without either being arrested for assault. But it must be a mutual agreement - none of this "if you don't accept my offer to beat the stuffing out of each other you have to admit you're wrong" nonsense. We're (nominally) a civilized society, not a pack of trolls. Captain Cade has turned down the duel, so that is that. You're all welcome to your own opinions on the character of the people involved, but there is no law that will force Captain Cade to admit anything just because he doesn't want to get in a knife-fight with Miss Demeanor (I certainly wouldn't). If Lord Tartaros wishes to have Captain Cade arrested for besmirching a noble, or have the situation further investigated, I am quite sure he will say so.

Miss Potrevski, you have asked a number of intelligent questions. I will do my best to answer them for you. Please feel free to ask for further clarification if you desire.

You are somewhat correct in that the sea does not belong to any one nation. However, waters close to the ports of some nations, and frequently-traveled sailing routes, might be considered to be the "territory" of a nation. The distance is vague, as the sea is ever-changing, however a good rule of thumb on the minimum distance is that if you can see the shoreline of a land from the crow's nest then you are in their waters.

It is correct that Kormyre does not generally punish the breaking of Kormyrian law outside of its borders through the legal system. Even if they were aiding an enemy, or just targeting Kormyrian ships because they can, it would not even necessarily fall under the punishment of the legal system in that case - they would merely be declared an enemy of Kormyre, no longer one of Her subjects, and thus not under the protections of Her laws (Which, to those who are not adept at reading between the lines, means that it's legal for a Kormyrian subject to stab them unless otherwise instructed. This is why no one gets arrested when everyone goes on their little stabbing jaunts against horrible cultists and the like.).

The gap concerning attacks on non-Kormyrian, but non-enemy people/ships/cargo/etc. that you have brought up is called "politics". Some examples to illustrate some of the variances in response:
1) A ship not attached to any recognized Kormyrian guild, land, noble, commission, etc. that attacks the ship of a friendly or neutral nation would most likely be declared "not one of ours" and let the target exact whatever justice they desire; if we're on good terms (or trying to get on good terms) with the targeted group, they might receive a promise from us to seize that ship and turn it over if it docked in any of our ports, or something similar.
2) A ship that is officially attached to any guild, etc. is likely breaking their charter (or other orders) by attacking a friendly or neutral ship. They would then be subject to the laws of Kormyre concerning theft, destruction of property, etc. as laid out in their charter, and they may suffer other consequences depending upon our relationship with the aggrieved nation and the severity of the attack.
3) If we are provably aware of the existence of a ship of "pirates" (using your definition) - say, if a bunch of them posted up a big notice in the center of town saying "WE ARE PIRATES" and signed their names - and we allow them safe haven in our waters, other nations will hold us responsible for their actions, even if they do not own any of the ships that are attacked. If they do own the ships that are attacked, at best we would probably end up paying for the damage caused and wealth stolen; at worst they may see the attacks as an act of war.

That last example is where the fear of the word "pirate" comes from. It is the fear that the greed of one group of people will drag the entire kingdom into a war, causing untold loss of life and damage.

I have sent you my response. How this plays out is now in your hands. As much as it pains me to write this, I am not entirely opposed to a diplomatic solution. Those who know me, are familiar with my love of battle and my thirst for bloodshed. I suggest you get a handle on your people, they get their one free insult or jab, since they do not know me. If they feel so inclined to continue then we can sort it out with blades instead - my preferred method.

I await your response.

~Atrus
"Only those who have endured the greatest suffering can become the greatest people."

Seneschal, thank you much for your patient and clear responses to my question; it makes much sense to me. I still believe I would like to present a request to the Baron or some other authority that theft and destruction at sea be illegalized in a more explicit way. The reason for this is in your words:

LoisMaxwell wrote: If we are provably aware of the existence of a ship of "pirates" (using your definition) - say, if a bunch of them posted up a big notice in the center of town saying "WE ARE PIRATES" and signed their names - and we allow them safe haven in our waters, other nations will hold us responsible for their actions, even if they do not own any of the ships that are attacked. If they do own the ships that are attacked, at best we would probably end up paying for the damage caused and wealth stolen; at worst they may see the attacks as an act of war.

If the harboring of a pirate is such a grave political danger, and yet we have no explicit law against it, then the only way political needs could be served is at the disservice to the citizens - citizens who, though villainous, have not broken any laws. Political needs must be served; there is no question of their importance. Justice to citizens must be served as well, though, and the best way of ensuring such justice is to lay its guidelines forth clearly.
You, I know, do business for the baron and speak to him frequently; perhaps you could relay my request, or arrange for me to relay it to him myself should it be necessary?

You are not wrong to say that this method of, what is the phrase, "plausible deniability" serves politics more than it serves justice. Let us speak more on this at the next Feast. The Baron has stated that he prefers to be brought solutions, not problems; perhaps together you and I can come up with something to present to His Excellency or His Grace.

Maritime law is not a purview of the Barony of Travance, and thus not commonly noted around here. It is something held by the greater kingdom and enforced by the Navy. However, it seems, Miss Potrevski, that there is always room for improvements in clarity. I look forward to hearing from what Lois has to say about your conversation.

For the matter of the proclaimed pirate, Cade Tanwyn. I will state this publicly so it is clear to everyone. Your ship is being graned permission to remain in port until the August Baronial Feast where you and I have agreed to talk at greater length regarding these accords and concerns with the land of Dregamire and the Kormyrian Navy.
You are not accused nor guilty of any crimes at this moment. And while some may feel my honor and name have been besmirched, I do not feel so. I may have been called a liar and my promises empty, but these are simply the words of a distraught sailor. I've been called worse.

I would strongly suggest everyone who is reading this post consider their actions carefully, both Cade's crew and the subjects of the Barony. There is no reason for this to erupt any further unnecessarily.

In service to The Crown,
-Lord Admiral Aleister Tartaros the Phoenix
-Lord of Drega'mire
-Admiral of the Kormyrian Royal Navy

Captain Jackdaw wrote: Apparently my questions regarding the Articles and what does or does not constitute piracy have yet to be answered. I feel as though this might be my fault, I think I missed the question and answer portion of the discussion and came in during the "challenge the crew of the night harrier to combat." portion.

Sorry mate, been a smidge busy responding to more private mail then I have ever received in my life, juggling 3 separate meetings that i'm now trying to coordinate, running as much of this by my crew and other signers of the Accords, and as silly as this seems I do have a job. I promise I will respond to as much as I can when I can. Also if you would like to reach out to me privately it might help me stay on top of your message and get to your questions.

Co-founder Tanwyn Trading
Captain Cade Tanwyn of The Night Harrier
Author of the Pirate Accords founded in 1217

I have sent you my response. How this plays out is now in your hands. As much as it pains me to write this, I am not entirely opposed to a diplomatic solution. Those who know me, are familiar with my love of battle and my thirst for bloodshed. I suggest you get a handle on your people, they get their one free insult or jab, since they do not know me. If they feel so inclined to continue then we can sort it out with blades instead - my preferred method.

I await your response.

Atrus, I Cade Tanwyn, hereby humbly request you rescind your honor combat challenge until after a meeting to talk this out. Two witnesses have come forward to corroborate the details you did not have to the matter in question. If you wish to see a peaceful solution to this I believe one can reasonably be achieved.

Co-founder Tanwyn Trading
Captain Cade Tanwyn of The Night Harrier
Author of the Pirate Accords founded in 1217

Given what has be written here, and your request, I am willing to withdraw my challenge to you and your crew for the time being. This is contingent upon how you and yours choose to conduct themselves between now and our meeting. I believe you have all necessary details, and my public assurance that I will not harm you or your crew without undue cause.

If you or they wish for violence, I can only offer this; your bodies will not be desecrated nor your property stolen, and I will not feed upon any of you, whether dead, or alive.

I am willing to hear you out, and your people are encouraged to accompany you. I have no other demands or terms.

This is my word,

~Atrus
"Only those who have endured the greatest suffering can become the greatest people."

Syllus Crone wrote: So will this meeting actually happen? I have some friends that wish to attend.

Silas, it's always good to hear from you. I will be meeting with a host full of people throughout next feast. I'm hopping to sit down afterwords and make some strong edits to the curent version of these Accords. A formal meeting with people who would like to sign on to these accords will likely have to wait until after the August feast. I would love for your friends to personally reach out to me. I'm very excited at how many people have responded positively so far and it would be my pleasure to meet your friends.

Co-founder Tanwyn Trading
Captain Cade Tanwyn of The Night Harrier
Author of the Pirate Accords founded in 1217